2. There are a historic number of GOP governors.... [including 2 Hispanics]...

3. The electoral map is bad, but not that bad....

4. History is on their side. Presidential politics in the post-World War II era tend to be defined by the pendulum effect....

On #4, I still remember the Newsweek cover that followed the 1964 election: a sick/dying/beaten-up elephant in bed. Having supported Goldwater and grasped something of the value of conservatism, I found the image truly disturbing. And I was old enough to think somewhat deeply about it. Conservatism would never get its message across now. LBJ would distribute endless gifts and the people would never be willing to hand them back. And yet, 4 years later, Richard Nixon, the loser from 4 years earlier, would arrive — the "new Nixon" — and he seemed fresh, a source of hope.

Just my luck, though, I'd leaped leftward by then. Not that I could vote. On Election Day, I was 2 months shy of my 18th birthday, which wasn't as intensely frustrating as it sounds. In those days, you had to be 21 to vote. In an amazing run of bad luck, beginning in 1972 — when, irritatingly, all the 18-to-20-year-olds got in on voting too — I voted for 5 losing presidential candidates before my choice won. There have been 5 presidential election since that one, and I've supported the winner in 3 of them. In all of those 11 elections, there was only one man who won twice with me voting for him both times. That is, I've only voted for one 2-term President and stuck with him for the reelection.

I kinda agree with Tank. I have had 2-3 brief snippets of conversation with people who revealed without my prodding they voted for Obama for the dumbest reasons...One example- a retired Catholic high school teacher [a woman] who was turned off when Romney said his wife had a Cadillac. I was speechless.

The only way conservatism can make a come back is to educate and inform citizens starting at a young age and that is a huge perhaps impossinle task when it has to beat back the daily librul drumbeat in the MSM.

There's also a point which another writer, Megan McArdle if I recall correctly, recently brought up: public employee pensions are a huge spectre haunting the Democratic Party and which could very well blow up right in the party's face. All throughout the country public employees are getting lavish pensions that are completely unaffordable. To save states and especially local governments from complete financial ruin these pensions are going to have to get the meat-ax treatment, but because public employees are a very big source of Democratic power the party is sure to be the big loser in the end.

Or you could believe the people who say, "Hispanics [religious blacks, Asians, etc] are natural conservatives. LOL.

Many conservative ideas are naturally appealing to these immigrants.

Of course hating the current immigrant stream, a must for today's conservative, is not one of them.

You guys are going to have to do an inventory of your beliefs and, if you want to survive and for the country to survive as well, you're going to have to shit-can a number of them while focusing on the ones that can pass as respectable.

Accepting personal responsibility is a great place to begin and that can appeal to all Americans, assuming you do it right. Cloaking it up in that Ayn Rand shit is a total loser though.

Just the opinion of a concerned troll, however. You needn't worry about me.

Conservative philosophy has gained no traction in the last 80 years, but the Gods of the Copybook Headings cannot be ignored forever.

I've accepted the sorry fact that things are going to have to get very very un-ironic, so very painfully real, before people once again acknowledge some simple truths.

Some shoes are beginning to fall at work. I wish I could describe the stricken face of a lefty supervisor here, forced to communicate that pain was coming, and right quick, despite her fervent belief that robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul created endless abundance.

Goldwater? and Dr. Althouse ended up in Madison?I am the guy who coined "not that conservative, just hate the media" meme and I still remember Goldwater being maimed by the media so much so that i thought he was a monster. Of course, my dad didn't like it much when i put the 'Dump Nixon' bumper sticker on the station wagon when he visited my sophmore year, so i was medium liberal back then anyway.Right now, I see Rubio and Christie as reasonable, but I still see the Republicans as neanderthals because of the spin from MSM. Can't help it.If TV couldn't shape minds, commercials for the super bowl would be $1 a minute.

phx said "Of course hating the current immigrant stream, a must for today's conservative, is not one of them."

You've got a finger-hold on part of the problem, but it eludes your grasp. Conservatives don't hate the immigrant stream. We love immigrants. They love America more than the self-loathing liberals who were born here.

We think, though, that unbridled immigration carries many problems, including wage suppression, which should concern liberals a lot if they were wise enough to recognize or admit it.

America gains from immigration. Look what's happening now: the economic slow-down has almost halted it. That's a complex problem, and we should find a way to fix it. I say start by firing everyone in the incompetent INS.

Meanwhile, we've allowed a vast migration of Dem's and future Dem's into the country.

I'm so sorry we let people into the country you don't like.

Individually, I know and like many of these people. As a group, they are (except for Asians) less intelligent, less skilled and less likely to bring assets, and more likely to vote for bigger gov't. That is the problem for people who want a small gov't and a capable, great country.

PHX,Glad you brought up immigration. Just spent the week with a friend from Cambridge (Eng) who whooped up the Obama win and then proceeded to complain about the EU immigration policy where people can slip in and then get into England somehow.All of the liberals in the group somehow forgot to call him a racist.

Memo: For the most part, legal immigrants are the same as illegal, for purposes of this analysis.

Why not stop all immigration until we "catch up." We don't need more people looking for work. Or more people in general. If we're going to let more people in, why not wealthier, intelligent, skilled people who can add something?

phx said "Of course hating the current immigrant stream, a must for today's conservative, is not one of them."

I don't have an issue with anyone criticizing my formulation here. I do believe that conservatives CAN have a positive impact on immigration reform, and that this could be an issue that's a winner for them.

Not so much if you're going to take a very hardline on illegals who are already here, build a fence, and generally be obnoxious and disreputable concerning immigrant's primary language and culture - a couple of things the Repub base has been known for.

Freder could look at a picture of the AP's lily white board of directors and see smart, fair people. Hell, he would see the same thing if he were looking at a pic of the NYT's lily white roster of regular columnists or MSNBC's talking heads. Yet, conservative people who oppose illegal immigrants muts be evil racists.

Point 1 is a good one and I say that as a Dem. Rubio and Christie seem like the real thing. Ryan and Jindal not so much. But unless the Ds put up Hillary, it's hard to see us having the stronger candidate in 2016. Andrew Cuomo is creepy.

From an electoral standpoint I don't see how this can work anymore (for the Republicans) New York, California and Illinois are big number states that are automatic for the Dems. Add to that, apparently, Ohio, Penn. and Florida and the Republicans win....how?

I've got a friend who claims the above former swing states are NOT automatic for the Dems. I'd be interested in hearing how I am wrong about this.

I remember that cover! I was all of nine-years-old, but my folks were very active in local Republican politics, in those days, and dragged us kids along to local Party headquarters, and such. And I shared the disappointment, though not really understanding much of it, when Goldwater lost. And I remember that image vividly! :D

AprilApple: "It's tough being the nerd. It's tough dealing with a nation over-flowing with economic ignorance."

I'm afraid we've already crossed that bridge.

All that's left now is too see how fast we reach "Greece status" (or Portugal/Spain/Italy etc).

We are already at a debt level = to our GDP.

In 4 years we will be at a debt level at 1.3x Annual GDP (assuming our GDP doesn't contract (which it will)).

Europe is already back in recession.

We will be lucky to reach an annual GDP growth of 1.5% for this year.

We have printed enough money over the last 4 years (thru QE I, II, and now III) to artificially inflate the stock market but now that the election is over, we are already hearing the Fed rumblings that the inevitable dip is coming.

Stagflation here we come.

Unfortunately, there is no other "America" out there to serve as the engine of growth to help pull us out of the trough.

There is only 1 place the dems can find the $$ sufficient to fulfill their goals, and that is the middle class.

As everyone has known forever.

The left has been calling folks who earn $250 per year "millionaires & billionaires" for decades now.

$250,000 per annum is what a senior detective married to a school administrator in NYC might earn together in a year with very little savings or other assets.

Oh well, as the greeks have shown, once the river of "free" money dries up, it can get ugly.

Frankly, the map is pretty good. When the crash comes, it will get a lot redder, particularly since a lot of those people the Lefties let in (somebody made a point over the weekend that Teddy Kennedy's old immigration bill was set up to let in the peons, not the Hidalgos) will go scurrying back to Guadalajara once the free goodies start drying up (2 million went last time and they've stayed there).

Peter said...

There's also a point which another writer, Megan McArdle if I recall correctly, recently brought up: public employee pensions are a huge spectre haunting the Democratic Party and which could very well blow up right in the party's face.

No could.

Will.

shiloh said...

So cons, don't you feel better now? Rhetorical.

Moronic.

Actually, it's mostly drivel.

And yes, after LBJ's '64 landslide idiot pundits like Cillizza said how will Reps ever recover ...

Nixon elected w/43.4% in '68.

Third party, ninny.

Bottom line, cons have over (4) years :) to mull it over as the presidential demos continue to swing heavily pro Dem

Sure.

Anybody remember "The Greening Of America" and how we were all going Lefty in the 70s?

Although it is true that the R's lost by only 300,000 to 400,000 votes in the swing states, in an election which saw obama's vote totals drop by 6M nationally, I would have to say that we have to confront the reality of obama's culturally-based campaign success.

Since the 1960's in particular, the left has effectively caricatured the right as the monocle-wearing monopoly guy (demonstrably false but so what?).

During that same period, historical events aided the R's in caricaturing (much more accurately) the intentions of the left which has caused the left to abandon "liberal" for "progressive" (a full circle trip over the last 100 years!)

The R's have to find the capacity to fight more effectively on the cultural front.

I agree that the fiscal realities are already hitting home for the voters who backed obama but it's going to get much much worse given the economic realities.

In 1980 the economic realities caused many (including young voters and other key groups) to swing to Reagan, a choice which was amplified and validated by the 49 state win in 1984.

Obama did not cruise to a 1984 style win this year. In fact, he lost votes.

My fear is that, like Greece, even when the undeniable economic reality hits the populace, there is no guarantee that they won't double down on leftism given our current cultural condition.

So Benghazi is now a punch line? An American ambassador was murdered and Obama did nothing and then lied about it. And you lefties laugh?

An American ambassador was murdered and you righties promptly went on the attack -- against the President of the United States. For initially calling it an "act of terror" perpetrated by "extremists" rather than using your preferred term, "terrorism." Don't lecture us about taking Benghazi seriously.

LBJ would distribute endless gifts and the people would never be willing to hand them back. And yet, 4 years later, Richard Nixon, the loser from 4 years earlier, would arrive — the "new Nixon" — and he seemed fresh, a source of hope.

Those gifts didn't go away though did they? We merely had a temporary decrease in the rate of increase of gifts.

See, that is always the question with the online lefty types: Do they know what they are saying is wrong and are just doing for solidarity purposes, or are they mere unwitting dupes simply following their talking points directives.

Competent people are expected to fix a problem, work around it, or live with it. Not express their frustration.

Which is all Lefties ever do.

Drago said...

Frankly, the map is pretty good.

Although it is true that the R's lost by only 300,000 to 400,000 votes in the swing states, in an election which saw obama's vote totals drop by 6M nationally, I would have to say that we have to confront the reality of obama's culturally-based campaign success.

Disagree due to the widespread vote fraud.

This was the real "ground game" for the Demos.

As I say, a lot of the vaunted demographic advantage the Democrats claim will be going South of the Border, Down Mexico Way once we have our next dip (will it be the 4th or the 5th?) in the "recession".

Then they will have an excuse for losing.

AF said...

So Benghazi is now a punch line? An American ambassador was murdered and Obama did nothing and then lied about it. And you lefties laugh?

An American ambassador was murdered and you righties promptly went on the attack -- against the President of the United States. For initially calling it an "act of terror" perpetrated by "extremists" rather than using your preferred term, "terrorism." Don't lecture us about taking Benghazi seriously.

Why not?

Especially since the Lefties covered themselves with glory over "Mission Accomplished" and TORTURE.

An American ambassador was murdered and Obama did nothing and then lied about it. And you lefties laugh?

An American ambassador was murdered and you righties promptly went on the attack -- against the President of the United States. For initially calling it an "act of terror" perpetrated by "extremists" rather than using your preferred term, "terrorism." Don't lecture us about taking Benghazi seriously.

Well, we could go back to talking about Operation Fast and Furious.

Operation F&F is the previous situation in which Obama and company somehow evaded a headline-inducing scandal. A scandal that was enabled and furthered by apparent lies and/or incompetence of the administration. One similarity: American law enforcement officer died at the hand of a foreigner who was armed with weapons bought under the aegis of the ATF's operation. The operation apparently allowed/encouraged certain criminals to acquire weapons from American dealers.

(I'm steamed about this scandal, but most people who've never done business at an American gun store don't know how much the ATF had to intervene before the gun store would make the sale to the criminals and friends-of-criminals involved. I mean, the ATF normally discourages such purchases, and the purchasers would often fail the NICS. Worse, dealers have the right to not make a sale even if the guy passes the check. And the buyers fell into a pattern of paying cash for dozens of rifles at a time, often hinting that they would be back within a month for another dozen or so. That pattern ought to have been enough for the dealers to stop. But the ATF said it was aiding an ongoing investigation...)

Anyway...the dispute about Benghazi is much more about why Obama and friends seemed so eager to blame the attack on an unknown American film-maker, than about whether or not it was called an act of terror.

It's also about why an American ambassador was sent into a situation without much security. Months after he'd asked for better security.

And about why (or whether) local military forces were told to stand down.

Strike out Chris Christie. He is a one term-er. Liberals hate him, Republicans will not vote for him after his kissing up to Obama and refusing to join Romney at the end of the campaign. On top of that obvious betrayal, he was competing with Nanny Bloomberg to claim the title of Mayor Nagin in the east. He is now the poster boy of arrogance, abrasiveness and incompetence. Oh, he promised to raise taxes too.

If the stagnant economy continues for the next four years and the debt keeps piling up, along with the fiscal wrecks of Cal., N.Y., and Ill., the Republican nominee would have an easy path to victory. The Dems own the economy, Obamacare, the debt, and the fiscal wreck of the blue model.

The Repub nominee in 2016 could run on the platform of not bailing out Cal., N.Y., and Ill. and would win 47 states.

I think at this point many republicans and conservatives feel fairly dejected about not only the outcome of the election, but in how the electorate is so dumbed down now to the point of it not being wort voting against them because in the new idiocracy, we will lose. It's all a routing action now. Minimizing the losses in the face of a tipping point opposition. These fools don't even know know what they are voting for because it's hard to defeat 60 years of leftist indoctrination and inculcation from k-12 on top of a media stream that is dedicated to seeing that leftist ideology is the only ideology.

I see that edutcher is still pushing his "Mittens won in a landslide but the Democrats stole the election" lunacy. It's a shame that he won't take the advice of his Althouse buddies to take a few weeks off to try to restore his sanity.

I see that edutcher is still pushing his "Mittens won in a landslide but the Democrats stole the election" lunacy. It's a shame that he won't take the advice of his Althouse buddies to take a few weeks off to try to restore his sanity.

Really gets under your skin, doesn't it?

How about 8 years of, "We wuz robbed", "It's torture", "The real war is in A-stan", "Bush lied, people died", "My Little Pony", and everybody's favorite, "Mission Accomplished"?

>> Meanwhile, we've allowed a vast migration of Dem's and future Dem's into the country.

>> Or you could believe the people who say, "Hispanics [religious blacks, Asians, etc] are natural conservatives. LOL.

Latino immigrants are similar to past patterns for irish, italian, and eastern european immigrants -- blue-collar types who are happy to work hard as long as they have jobs. Within 20 years or so, a lot of them will be like other Catholics in the Reagan-Democrat pattern.

But they're not dumb, either -- Republicans are happy to scapegoat them to turn out the white vote in greater numbers, and they notice that. From the Arizona law that was widely seen as encouraging racial-profiling-based harassment to O'Reilly complaining that "the white establishment" isn't in control of the country anymore, why would Latinos want to vote Republican?

And the minority of Asians in the U.S. aren't Christian. So when Republicans talk about this being a Christian country and running it according to Christian values, I can't imagine that their rhetoric has the same appeal to Asian Hindus, Buddhists, and agnostics. And anti-immigrant laws scare them as well.

The reality is that Republicans have been running a racially motivated platform more than Democrats have lately, but because the race they're targeting is white, somehow people expect their message of appealing to traditional white Christian values to be appealing to everyone.

Nope. It makes me sad to see your brain failing you so miserably. I know you don't understand this, but I don't dislike you. In fact I feel sorry for you, just as I feel sorry for any creature that is suffering from cognitive disorders. That's why I encourage you to calm down and apply reason to some of the ridiculous things you keep posting.

And I have more evidence for my view than Diamond has for all of his.

And how do you claim to know this? You've already proven that you are entirely ignorant of statistical analysis, and you've demonstrated repeatedly that your reading comprehension is poor. You continue to link to a loony website that claims that Obama was programmed and sent to the US by Soviet communists. Do you really think that other people will be convinced by the gibberish posted at a conspiracy theory blog?

You're becoming more pathetic each day, edutcher. You should really take a break from Althouse.

When people dismiss evidence of a County vote differential ratio of something like a 100,000 to Zero as dementia... or some other partisan foible... tells me they want to cover the sun with their index finger.

No Southern Republican Governor who is a huge social conservative freak will ever win the White House. All of you sometimes forget the Western, Northeastern, and upper midwest states. Jindal loves getting in peeps bedrooms too.

There were like no Southern Republicans at the Republican Convention-maybe the fish from SC but she is a major wingnut too and would never win. Embrace any southern at your own peril, plus those states are taker states.

"Since the 1960's in particular, the left has effectively caricatured the right as the monocle-wearing monopoly guy (demonstrably false but so what?)."

THis comment made me recall a DISGUSTING program I saw last night on PBS after Ken BUrns "Dustbowl" documentary. It included a "serious" social research segment on the use of a Monopoly game to "teach" people about the flaws of unbridled capitalsim. It was on after that great dustbowl Ken Burns documentary. A PERFECT example of the biased media and their views of what "rich fat-cat Republicans" are really like, in the lefty mind. Oh, well. Obama's reelection keeps the liberal subsity for PBS firmly in place for another four defecit-filled years.........

Republicans will win easily next time as we run Marco Rubio as an empty vessel and lie and slander the Democrats who will be under assault due to the exeptionally poor performance of the Jug Eared Jesus.

Senator Rubio should just vote "present" and raise money for the next four years and he will be in like Flynn.

Nope. It makes me sad to see your brain failing you so miserably. I know you don't understand this, but I don't dislike you

Yes, that's why you call me names, or is that another Diamond (next shift, I guess)?

I feel sorry for any creature that is suffering from cognitive disorders.

Sure.

Anybody who disagrees with Diamond is mentally ill.

You've already proven that you are entirely ignorant of statistical analysis, and you've demonstrated repeatedly that your reading comprehension is poor.

I see you've gotten back from the "office". You really need new writers, the catchphrases and tics are a dead giveaway.

You continue to link to a loony website that claims that Obama was programmed and sent to the US by Soviet communists.

I continue? I link a piece twice, how dast I?

The guy made an analogy to an old story he'd heard, but the thrust of the piece which Diamond (Hell, some phony folksy) doesn't want to address is that the Republicans are legally barred by a Federal court order from taking steps to prevent vote fraud.